NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile versus NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 79% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 140 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 26506 versus 19571
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 26506 versus 19571
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 114349 versus 74179
Caractéristiques | |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 140 Watt versus 250 Watt |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 26506 versus 19571 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 26506 versus 19571 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 114349 versus 74179 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
- Environ 60% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1440 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Environ 12% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1770 MHz versus 1575 MHz
- 8x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective)
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 792 versus 616
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 18675 versus 16138
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1440 MHz versus 900 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1770 MHz versus 1575 MHz |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 versus 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 versus 3711 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3356 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 792 versus 616 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18675 versus 16138 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 |
---|---|---|
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 26506 | 19571 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 26506 | 19571 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 616 | 792 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 16138 | 18675 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 114349 | 74179 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 488.989 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 5451.006 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 41.461 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 153.677 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1534.582 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 13943 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
Nom de code | GA104 | TU102 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 118 | 120 |
Date de sortie | 13 August 2018 | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $6,299 | |
Genre | Workstation | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1575 MHz | 1770 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz | 1440 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 604.8 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.35 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 19.35 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 6144 | |
Pixel fill rate | 151.2 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 302.4 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 140 Watt | 250 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 17400 million | 18,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 8-pin |
Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 3.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.6 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 448 GB/s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 14000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 |